Embodied knowing: Toward a teacher education pedagogy of relational witnessing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces a model for teacher education that gives shape and meaning to witnessing one's own reactions to and development of equity-based teaching. Data from a school-based teacher inquiry group provide two illustrations of how the model, based on a conceptual framework from feminist ethics, can be used to guide relational witnessing for teachers who are striving toward equity-based practice. We conclude with recommendations for understanding and mobilizing embodied encounters in teacher education toward a pedagogy of relational witnessing for teacher education with a focus on bringing dysconscious assumptions to the surface through the use of dispositional language. • Relational witnessing pedagogical model based in feminist theory. • Embodied knowledge represented as emotional, positional, normative, and structural. • Suggests a pedagogy for teacher education striving for equity-based teaching. • Dispositions for teaching featured as necessary language for relational witnessing. • Relational witnessing includes bringing dysconscious assumptions to the surface.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".